[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <66906bd5-d73f-af96-bf38-c6aee576fa73@acm.org>
Date: Wed, 17 May 2023 19:23:20 -0700
From: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
To: Yu Kuai <yukuai1@...weicloud.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc: Ed Tsai <ed.tsai@...iatek.com>, axboe@...nel.dk,
linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, martin.petersen@...cle.com,
stanley.chu@...iatek.com, peter.wang@...iatek.com,
chun-hung.wu@...iatek.com, alice.chao@...iatek.com,
powen.kao@...iatek.com, naomi.chu@...iatek.com,
wsd_upstream@...iatek.com, "yukuai (C)" <yukuai3@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ufs: don't use the fair tag sharings
On 5/17/23 18:49, Yu Kuai wrote:
> Currently, fair share from hctx_may_queue() requires two
> atomic_read(active_queues and active_requests), I think this smoothing
> method can be placed into get_tag fail path, for example, the more times
> a disk failed to get tag in a period of time, the more tag this disk can
> get, and all the information can be updated here(perhaps directly
> record how many tags a disk can get, then hctx_may_queue() still only
> require 2 atomic_read()).
That sounds interesting to me. Do you perhaps plan to implement this
approach and to post it as a patch?
Thanks,
Bart.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists